primate
-
Content Count
553 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by primate
-
-
Since he was mentioned in the opening post to this thread let me quote Eckhart Tolle who said "Analyzing the pointer is pointless."...
I agree. But the more exact a pointer points to what it is intended to point to, the better. If a pointer is exactly on target, we only need to follow its direction to find the target. If, on the other hand, a pointer is not exactly on target, we may have to search a whole region that is approximately pointed to, in order to find the intended target. Especially when the medium of words and language is used inexactly as a pointer, there is the risk that you will find something completely different from what was originally intended, simply because it seems closest to the meaning of the words.
1) "Krishna is the source of Brahman"
Due to the causal or temporal connotation of the word 'source', this can’t be correct, although it just might have been intended to indicate the supremacy of Krishna over Brahman.
2) "Krishna is the basis of Brahman"
This is better. It could mean that Krishna is a more basic aspect or principle of the Absolute Truth than Brahman. However, it also appears to mean that Brahman is derived from Krishna, or that Brahman is based on Krishna. Therefore, again, due to the causal/temporal undertone, this can’t be exactly correct; although, again, it might just have been the intention to indicate the supremacy of Krishna over Brahman.
3) "Brahman is an attribute of Krishna"
This seems to be much better. There is no causality involved. No temporal assumption at all. Brahman simply is an attribute of Krishna, and both are aspects of the same Absolute Truth. It also complies with 1) and 2), by indicating the supremacy of Krishna over Brahman.
4) "Krishna is an attribute of Brahman"
This states the opposite of 3), and it is very far removed from 1) and 2), because it doesn’t indicate the supremacy of Krishna over Brahman. Therefore, it's unlikely to be correct.
-
"Faith is blind" is a poetic construct."Faith is reliance on others to have done their duty faithfully."
Ie: I have blind faith that the Office-Building will stand without collapse . . . because the Professional builders were overseen & inforced by Government regulations.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Q. How to make our bhakti to god untainted by blind faith?
A. The principles of a) knowledge and b) detachment gained from . . .
"Knowledge & detachment" is a very deep & heavy topic!
"Before enlightenment chop wood and carry water--- After enlightenment chop wood and carry water."
It's big, it's heavy, it's wood..
-
Name the Goal and then name the degree of Preparation required --and then the quantity of real-world experience . . . then "Correct Faith" (or "Partial Faith", or "False Faith") transforms itself into "Conviction with its appropriate Code-of-Conduct".Blind faith is the starting point in acquiring any expert knowledge --later it matures . . . until a person is expected to Charitably-Share-the-Benefit-of-One's own-Knowledge-with-others.
MAybe the idea is What is the difference between "Cheating, white lies, self-interest vs Bhakti-Yoga disciplines".
The path of salvation from (SAMSARA) fully depends on the principles of knowledge and detachment gained from serving the Lord (via a bonefide representative).
Faith is blind, per definition..
-
Okay PassingThru. I can tell you that personally I’ve learned quite a bit from these forums. My interest is mainly philosophical and some (more or less religious) discussions made me adjust and/or better understand my own (more or less formal) theory of reality. In terms of hard physics, I wouldn’t expect too much input here, although personally I may be able to link your data with a particularly elegant, non-linear mathematical model of material reality.
I have a PhD in neuro-sciences, mainly from doing computer-simulation studies of the brain, using various neural-network formalisms, genetic algorithms, and other computational search - and optimization algorithms. But I came to the conclusion, that (apart from low level perceptual processing), the working of the (mammalian) brain cannot be understood in terms of a computer program (or Turing-machine). This is especially evident when it comes to higher cognitive processes, like reasoning, understanding and consciousness.
So, currently I’m working as a software engineer, solving complex scheduling problems and other interesting tasks, which are difficult for humans, but relatively easy for a computer, because the latter can do arithmetic calculations really much faster than our human brain.
Good luck!
-
Okay Sant, the statement is not entirely correct or unambiguous. I think I already explained it, but here goes one more time, because I think it’s quite relevant.
The sun and the sunlight, are often used to illustrate the relation between Krishna the Supreme Personality of Godhead and His effulgence the Brahman. The idea is that even though the sun and the sunlight exist simultaneously, the sun is the source of the sunlight. So, even though Krishna and the Brahman effulgence exist simultaneously, Krishna is the supreme principle of reality.
There is, however, a problem with this sun-metaphor. The sunlight is spatially separate from the sun. Nuclear fusion reactions in the sun’s core produce heat and ultimately photons (and other types of radiation), which are emitted by the sun and travel away from the sun at the speed of light. When these photons reach Earth (after 8.3 minutes), we see this as the sun and its sunlight. However, what we actually see are just these photons, from which we conclude that there must exist a sun in the sky.
Now, as you know, God is all pervasive, and Krishna and His Brahman effulgence are simultaneous aspects of the same Absolute Truth. This means that, contrary to the sun and the sunlight, they are not spatially separate entities. Furthermore, they are also not separated in time, because they exist simultaneously. Importantly, this means that one cannot be 'the cause' of the other.
For example, a nuclear fusion reaction in the sun’s core between two atoms of hydrogen - that combine to create helium and energy, which is ultimately emitted as photons - can be said to be 'the cause' of the emitted photons. Cause and effect are not simultaneous. A cause precedes its effect. So, cause and effect (or action and reaction, if you like) are always separated events in time. Simultaneous events or phenomena, on the other hand, are events that occur at exactly the same point in time. There cannot exist a causal relation between any two simultaneous events or phenomena. one event cannot be 'the cause' of another simultaneous event.
In fact, we know of only one type of correlated events in our material reality that occur simultaneously. These are so called 'entangled' quantum events. When, for example, the 'spin' (or another property) of one of two entangled quantum particles is changed, the spin of the other particle changes accordingly and instantaneously, no matter how large the distance between them. Einstein called this 'spooky action at a distance'. Any other physical or material events or phenomena that we know of (including sunlight), always seem to occur as the result of a causal (action-reaction-like, non-simultaneous) relation with other material events..
-
BERLIN (June 25) — A bird-bone flute unearthed in a German cave was carved some 35,000 years ago and is the oldest handcrafted musical instrument yet discovered, archaeologists say, offering the latest evidence that early modern humans in Europe had established a complex and creative culture..
-
Before we go any further, I will need to know more of your background. I have worked on this a long time. I just may need to pass on thru until I find myself in the right circumstances, back in our ancient homeland.What do you need to know? What right circumstances do you mean? After all, this is public internet..
If you have found some ground braking scientific answers to religious questions, I would publish the research in a peer reviewed journal, and I suppose we will hear about it in due time.
If, however, you have questions or uncertainties concerning the subject matter, we can discuss these here.. -
But either way primate you are missing the point which is the timeless, seemless existence of Krishna and His aura the Brahman effulgence with Krishna as the basis of that Brahman.Focus on the Moon bro. and forget the finger!
Sri Isopanishad 15
hiranmayena patrena
satyasyapihitam mukham
tat tvam pushann apavrinu
satya-dharmaya drishtaye
SYNONYMS
hiranmayena -- by a golden effulgence; patrena -- by a dazzling covering; satyasya -- of the Supreme Truth; apihitam -- covered; mukham -- the face; tat -- that covering; tvam -- Yourself; pushan -- O sustainer; apavrinu -- kindly remove; satya -- pure; dharmaya -- unto the devotee; drishtaye -- for exhibiting.
TRANSLATION
O my Lord, sustainer of all that lives, Your real face is covered by Your dazzling effulgence. Kindly remove that covering and exhibit Yourself to Your pure devotee.
PURPORT
In the Bhagavad-gita (14.27), the Lord explains His personal rays (brahmajyoti), the dazzling effulgence of His personal form, in this way:
brahmano hi pratishthaham
amritasyavyayasya ca
sasvatasya ca dharmasya
sukhasyaikantikasya ca
"I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman, which is immortal, imperishable and eternal and is the constitutional position of ultimate happiness." Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagavan are three aspects of the same Absolute Truth. Brahman is the aspect most easily perceived by the beginner; Paramatma, the Supersoul, is realized by those who have further progressed; and Bhagavan realization is the ultimate realization of the Absolute Truth. This is confirmed in the Bhagavad-gita (7.7), where Lord Krishna says that He is the ultimate concept of the Absolute Truth: mattah parataram nanyat. Therefore Krishna is the source of the brahmajyoti as well as the all-pervading Paramatma.
...
Here Prabhupada says: "Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagavan are three aspects of the same Absolute Truth". So, there is only One Absolute Truth, although it has different aspects, which can be known separately, in different stages of Krishna Consciousness.
"Krishna is the ultimate concept of the Absolute Truth: mattah parataram nanyat". In my understanding, this means that Krishna is the complete concept of the Absolute Truth. So far so good. But Prabhupada also states: "Krishna is 'the source' of the brahmajyoti as well as the all-pervading Paramatma", and "Krishna is 'the basis' of Brahman". Both these 'finger pointings' can be misunderstood as: Krishna is 'the cause' of Brahman, as a result of their temporal connotation..
-
The Brahman is an attribute of Krsna's.Yes, I think that is a much better statement than "Krishna is the basis (or source) of Brahman"..
-
You just said that sun and sunlight dont exist simultaneously.But wherever there is sun there is sunlight.
I didn't say that!
-
Yes but my point was that the flame is cause of light.Wherever the sun is it will emit light simultaneously.Yes, but that's not relevant for the discussion. We are looking here for simultaneously (non-causally) correlated events..
-
Wait dr kaiserose.IT doesnt mean taht the light is not there when the sun is there.It only takes time to reach us but it doent mean that the sun exists without emitting light.The point is, that there is an action-reaction-like relation between a light source and the light it emits. In your example of a mach, first the sulphur and phosphor in the tip of the match must ignite, and only after that the match starts to emit light. So the match is the cause of the light.
Now, in the case of Krishna and Brahman, neither is the cause of the other. They simply exist simultaneously. They are different aspects of the same causeless Absolute Truth..
-
IS this just a theory or can you provide some source from where you said it.And i thought the sunshine was emitted by lord surya.
Didn't you know that when you look at the stars, you are actually looking at the stars as they existed millions of (light)years in the past. Some of the stars we can still see today, may not even exist anymore..
-
Clearly from my quote above I anticipated your response would be to quibble with the example, which you did anyway despite my attempt to it by acknowledging the fault in the example. Every material analogy is imperfect when attempting to illustrate a spiritual reality. Indeed all human language and thought fails.Ever hear Lao Tzu's famous saying, "Don't mistake my finger for the moon"?
When someone is pointing you to the Moon don't stare at the finger, look at the moon.
But seriously I have nothing beyond the few points I have given already to say. If I see something I will add it.
Please do not think there is any bad feelings in this. I enjoy our exchanges and look forward to more.
Hare Krishna
That's okay Theist. No bad feelings here either. Sorry for the unnecessary remark on the sunshine metaphor.
-
So it means that sun causes sunshine since nuclear reactions are of the sun and not the sunshine.And how can yoy say that the sunshine is not there when the sun is there.I mean that the nuclear reactions within the Sun’s core and the resultant radiation do not exist simultaneously in time. Although the Sun and its sunshine (or a star and its starlight) appear to exist simultaneously, they are always separated in time.
Whenever there exists such a causal relationship between two events, this cannot be used as an example of the relation between Brahman, Paramatma and Bhagavan, because these are three simultaneous aspects of the same Absolute Truth, as per Prabhupada..
-
primate, I see now you think you know better what Prabhupada meant more than Prabhupada himself. Due to this no more can be gained by this conversation at this point.Good luck
Hare Krishna
No Theist, actually I completely agree with Prabhupada! But I think you didn't quote his translation of BG 14.27 in the correct context. That's what I try to say. And I think his purport of BG 4.24 proves this.
Apart from this, I just don't understand why Prabhupada didn't stick to the literal Sanskrit verse in his translation of Sri Isopanishad Invocation, which would have illustrated my point much better..
-
Sequential thinking is of time. You are correct. But it is you who are attempting to impose that conception onto the absolute.
I don’t think so! I’m attempting to remove the concept of time from the definition of the Absolute. Consequently, statements like "Krishna is the basis of Brahman" become problematic.
Krishna is called the Cause of all causes. Krishna caused the Brahman effulgence. This has to be accepted even though both Krishna the Supreme Personality of Godhead and His effulgent the Brahman.
Now you are imposing the concept of time onto the Absolute. Causality implies time. If time isn’t of the Absolute, Krishna cannot be the cause of the Brahman effulgence.
You call this sequential thinking but it is not. It appears contradictory to our minds because we are conditioned by sequential thinking as in past and future. Krishna perfectly houses all such apparent contradictions.
Agreed. Cause and effect only have meaning in our temporal material world.
The material (therefore not perfect but in this case nearly) example is the sun and the sunshine. Even though they both exist simultaneously still no one would argue the fact that the sun is the cause of the sunshine.
Indeed, the Sun and its rays are not a good example, because the Sun’s nuclear reactions are clearly the cause of its rays. They don’t exist simultaneously.
-
Krsna says in the Gita:
And I am the basis of the impersonal Brahman, which is the constitutional position of ultimate happiness, and which is immortal, imperishable and eternal.
The literal Sanskrit verse states: "I am the 'rest' of Brahman". I think that Prabhupada’s translation "Krishna is the 'basis' of Brahman", actually means that Krishna is the 'essence' of Brahman. So, Krishna and Brahman are simultaneous aspects of the same Absolute Truth. In fact, this is confirmed by Prabhupada himself in his purport of BG 4.24, in which he explains the method and the result of Krishna Consciousness:
Bhagavad-gita As It Is 4.24
brahmarpanam brahma havir
brahmagnau brahmana hutam
brahmaiva tena gantavyam
brahma-karma-samadhina
SYNONYMS
brahma -- spiritual in nature; arpanam -- contribution; brahma -- the Supreme; havih -- butter; brahma -- spiritual; agnau -- in the fire of consummation; brahmana -- by the spirit soul; hutam -- offered; brahma -- spiritual kingdom; eva -- certainly; tena -- by him; gantavyam -- to be reached; brahma -- spiritual; karma -- in activities; samadhina -- by complete absorption.
TRANSLATION
A person who is fully absorbed in Krishna consciousness is sure to attain the spiritual kingdom because of his full contribution to spiritual activities, in which the consummation is absolute and that which is offered is of the same spiritual nature.
PURPORT
How activities in Krishna consciousness can lead one ultimately to the spiritual goal is described here. There are various activities in Krishna consciousness, and all of them will be described in the following verses. But, for the present, just the principle of Krishna consciousness is described. A conditioned soul, entangled in material contamination, is sure to act in the material atmosphere, and yet he has to get out of such an environment. The process by which the conditioned soul can get out of the material atmosphere is Krishna consciousness. For example, a patient who is suffering from a disorder of the bowels due to overindulgence in milk products is cured by another milk product, namely curds. The materially absorbed conditioned soul can be cured by Krishna consciousness as set forth here in the Gita. This process is generally known as yajna, or activities (sacrifices) simply meant for the satisfaction of Vishnu, or Krishna. The more the activities of the material world are performed in Krishna consciousness, or for Vishnu only, the more the atmosphere becomes spiritualized by complete absorption. The word brahma (Brahman) means "spiritual." The Lord is spiritual, and the rays of His transcendental body are called brahmajyoti, His spiritual effulgence. Everything that exists is situated in that brahmajyoti, but when the jyoti is covered by illusion (maya) or sense gratification, it is called material. This material veil can be removed at once by Krishna consciousness; thus the offering for the sake of Krishna consciousness, the consuming agent of such an offering or contribution, the process of consumption, the contributor, and the result are -- all combined together -- Brahman, or the Absolute Truth. The Absolute Truth covered by maya is called matter. Matter dovetailed for the cause of the Absolute Truth regains its spiritual quality. Krishna consciousness is the process of converting the illusory consciousness into Brahman, or the Supreme. When the mind is fully absorbed in Krishna consciousness, it is said to be in samadhi, or trance. Anything done in such transcendental consciousness is called yajna, or sacrifice for the Absolute. In that condition of spiritual consciousness, the contributor, the contribution, the consumption, the performer or leader of the performance, and the result or ultimate gain -- everything -- becomes one in the Absolute, the Supreme Brahman. That is the method of Krishna consciousness.
So, if according to Prabhupada, everything ultimately becomes one in the Absolute Truth, the Supreme Brahman, then how can Vishnu/Krishna be the basis of Brahman, other than being Brahman?
Also, Isopanishad clearly speaks of a perfectly complete unit Om, from which everything originates:
Sri Isopanishad Invocation
om purnam adah purnam idam
purnat purnam udacyate
purnasya purnam adaya
purnam evavasishyate
SYNONYMS
om -- the Complete Whole; purnam -- perfectly complete; adah -- that; purnam -- perfectly complete; idam -- this phenomenal world; purnat -- from the all-perfect; purnam -- complete unit; udacyate -- is produced; purnasya -- of the Complete Whole; purnam -- completely, all; adaya -- having been taken away; purnam -- the complete balance; eva -- even; avasishyate -- is remaining.
TRANSLATION
The Personality of Godhead is perfect and complete, and because He is completely perfect, all emanations from Him, such as this phenomenal world, are perfectly equipped as complete wholes. Whatever is produced of the Complete Whole is also complete in itself. Because He is the Complete Whole, even though so many complete units emanate from Him, He remains the complete balance.
The above translation of Prabhupada mystifies me. The original verse simply states: Even if all is taken away from the perfectly complete unit Om, from which the perfectly complete phenomenal world is produced, the complete unit [Om] is remaining..
-
Brahman is a feature of Krishna, Krishna is not a feature of Brahman. Do you see what I mean? The Brahman is Krishna's emanation, His aura. A person emanates an aura, an aura does not emanate a person. There is a critical difference primate.
Well, I said: "there is in fact no difference between Krishna and Brahman or God". Krishna is the person (or knower) and Brahman is the mechanical system (or mechanism, if you like). In reality, I don’t think one is 'the basis' of the other. To be the basis of something, the basis must come first. This implies sequential order, which implies time, which implies Maya. And God isn’t subject to Maya or time; God is Maya..
-
You do shed light, and I believe do have it about right wrt entangled photons. But time does exist, no less than space, so we look to "coincidence" & "singularities" in "Time". Matter occupies space, but not Time. Material singularities exist in Time. But exclusionary principles exclude their extension into space (same time, same space"fusion"). Yog gives me the essence of Time: Absent the occurance of events, Time does not exist ("before" & "after" become meaningless).
Yes, I think you got it. This 'exclusionary principle' (Maya), is the basis of time. We consciously perceive only specific 'material singularities', that occur in a specific sequential order. Hence, the illusion of duality, change and time.
Coming now to the Brahmastra, in the context of Aspect's work, we could generate a Ca40 <---> K40 transformation to resolve a generated photon entanglement. Would be elegent, depending on the Yogi' s level of discipline. As a practical matter, would have to work with photon frequencies. Would any in Desh care to try the Physics?------------ all the clues worth the printing.
What do you mean? Are you proposing an actual experiment?
-
Agreed.
As I suggested earlier, I think God (impersonal Brahman) is total consciousness as well as total energy, all present in a singular cosmic oscillation. Our individual (material) consciousness is a discontinuous fraction of this total consciousness, and a function of its creative energy or Maya. In such a model we are simultaneously one with God and different from God, and God is the origin or basis of our (partial) consciousness.
According to this, our consciousness is incomplete, and since our knowledge is obviously part of our consciousness, our knowledge is incomplete. Therefore, we can never fully know God, or the origin of our consciousness.
If Krishna/Vishnu, or the supreme personality of Godhead, has total consciousness (including our own consciousness), then Krishna has complete knowledge of Brahman, and there is in fact no difference between Krishna and Brahman or God.
Perhaps my (implicit) question was, whether consciousness or knowledge and (mindful) understanding are equivalent. In other words, can total consciousness (or God) fully understand itself? I suspect, however, that 'understanding' is just a characteristic of our material brain and subtle mind. Beyond that, only absolute knowledge might exist..
-
Personally, I would be quite content just to know how the universe approximately works, and to understand who or what we are ourselves in relation to God. No need to understand God and/or His origin.
It’s even questionable whether any sentient being (including Vishnu/Krishna) can understand God as the origin of everything (or Brahman). Logically, no conscious entity can have complete knowledge of its own origin, because any knowledge is a part of the entity itself and therefore it is different from its origin.
This may also relate to 'Gödel's first incompleteness theorem', which basically states: There can never exist a complete system of formal logic that allows all true logical statements to be derived from itself. (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G%C3%B6del's_incompleteness_theorems)
-
Galatians 6:7-9 (King James Version)
7 Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
8 For he that soweth to his flesh shall of the flesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting.
9 And let us not be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not.
(The book of Galatians in the New Testament part of the Bible, is a letter written by Paul.)
-
Hahaha, i have to admit that you have beaten me on that point.Yes, we are going off topic.
We must remember Krishna when we die. I'm not sure if this is off any topic..
ParaBrahman' means GODHEAD
in Spiritual Discussions
Posted · Report reply
In the Dutch language, the term 'Godheid' is used, and in German it is 'Gottheit'. Semantically, these terms most closely resemble the English term 'Godhood' or 'Godness' or 'being God' or simply 'God'. The English term 'Godhead', however, could also mean 'head (or hood) of God', which might actually be a better translation of the Sanskrit word 'Bhagavate' or 'Bhagavan'..: